Is Cook worth it?

[Matt_In_NH]

4 hours ago, julian said:

Great… go find elite players while hes on this team… keep pushing back money into the future to get these players if necessary.

 

 10 years is very hopeful, and we all would love to see a 40yr old Allen still playing, but realistically we’re probably looking at 7-8 more years if we’re lucky.

 

 Once he hangs up the cleats, if it takes a couple years to rid the roster of all the dead money, who gives a sh*t. I’ll say it again, I understand you wanting to maintain a balanced budget, I just don’t care about that for the next 7 years .

The bills are not a team with a balanced balanced budget.  They are one of the teams pushing money into the future withhold years….. it leading the league that is the eagles.  But they are easy top 10 and probably higher in leveraging the future.  I understand you want every player who sounds available and had an all pro year but that is not going to happen.  The saints have not cleaned up their mess…they just keep pushing it forward and sucking.   
 

what great qbs are not making it to their late 30s?  Cam Newton maybe is one example but he never was the passer Allen is.  He could just hang it up early but all the recent greats have played that long or longer. 

[ScottishBills]

3 minutes ago, HamptonBillsfan said:

Stop with the Saquon stuff. It’s not true, you’re too gullible to be taken seriously.

 

I agree. 

And similarly James Cook should stop with the Saquon stuff. Him and his brother. 

 

That's the whole point!

[ScottishBills]

10 minutes ago, Matt_In_NH said:

 

what great qbs are not making it to their late 30s?  Cam Newton maybe is one example but he never was the passer Allen is.  He could just hang it up early but all the recent greats have played that long or longer. 

 

Man I really hope you're right but Allen takes a LOT of hits. He takes them like Superman, don't get me wrong, but it doesn't scream "17 year career" to me

Edited August 4 by ScottishBills

[GunnerBill]

21 minutes ago, ScottishBills said:

 

Fair enough, all reasonable points. Not sure I agree, but for interest why do you think then that the Bills don't use him more? Why is he not up at 70%+ like the big boys?

They must have a reason for keeping him down below 50%  and they must be at least as good as you at evaluating that?

 

To be honest I thought earlier in the season it was just management, keep him fresh for the postseason, but then we got there and right enough - 50% again. So it was a fixed plan by all appearances 

 

Not on the wind up - what do those who think he can take a higher workload think is the reason the Bills disagree?

 

Personally I think there are a few factors, but the two most significant are:

 

1. I think they genuinely do not think he is a very good pass protecting back (and it's true, he isn't). Ty Johnson has a specific role on the team as a result which results in a 3rd back stealing a lot of snaps and some carries; and 

 

2. They just believe in rotating backs through. It is who they have been since they have been here. Again I say this a lot but when you wanna know what Brandon Beane believe in go look at the Carolina Panthers. They had DeAngelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart sharing the load in the backfield together for years. It is a bit like their belief with regards to rotating defensive lineman. It's philosophical for them. 

 

 

Edited August 4 by GunnerBill

[DrDawkinstein]

13 minutes ago, ScottishBills said:

 

Man I really hope you're right but Allen takes a LOT of hits. He takes them like Superman, don't get me wrong, but it doesn't scream "17 year career" to me

 

Which is what made it so nice to have Cook last year take a lot of those QB runs off of Allen's shoulders. Runs that Davis and Ty cant do.

 

 

Edited August 4 by DrDawkinstein

[GunnerBill]

10 minutes ago, ScottishBills said:

 

Man I really hope you're right but Allen takes a LOT of hits. He takes them like Superman, don't get me wrong, but it doesn't scream "17 year career" to me

 

The guy you need to compare him to is Big Ben IMO. And as he got beyond 30 he definitely changed his game. He was never a runner as such but he used to get outside the pocket at take licks in his 20s to try and make a play down the field and that faded away completely in his 30s. However, until the elbow surgery in year 17 for him he was still playing at a very high level. And his comeback the year after that he was still a serviceable game manager he just couldn't throw deep any more.

 

I think Josh can have a long career. But he won't always be able to do some of the things that make him so unique. 

[Neo]

On 8/3/2025 at 6:12 PM, Ya Digg? said:

Wait, he’s doing everything people wanted him to do. He showed up, he has practiced, he has been quiet…literally everything people have demanded of him. What do you now want him to do?!?! 
 

 

I want him to honor his contract, participate in practice, stay off instagram with his negotiations, and avoid dramatic and cryptic responses to questions.   Same standard I set for me and my team.  

[ScottishBills]

10 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

  It's philosophical for them. 

 

 

 

I guess they are all stuck then. As you can't really pay high with that philosophy - and you maybe* can't take lower if you personally feel like you could do it if given the chance 

 

*I always think part of the issue with the wider argument is people who are very firmly "get what you can\its a short career\why are you supporting the billionaire\support the player" are unwilling to accept some people's view that the alternative isn't poverty or famine, and would also be fine. 

 

Let's say the Bills want to pay 36/3 and Cook wants 45/3 - I totally get the argument of how can you dare suggest he leave 9 million etc etc - but it's also true that getting paid 36m to run the ball is also very nice. And you get to do it behind a solid line whilst not being run into the ground like a dog. Not saying they should agree, but they seem so hellbent on players always getting the max that all reasonableness goes out the window. 

[Matt_In_NH]

26 minutes ago, ScottishBills said:

 

Man I really hope you're right but Allen takes a LOT of hits. He takes them like Superman, don't get me wrong, but it doesn't scream "17 year career" to me

I agree that makes him different.  However I think he showed last year he can slide he can go out of bounds and as time goes on I think he has the brain and ability to replace some of his running with passing.  

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, ScottishBills said:

 

I guess they are all stuck then. As you can't really pay high with that philosophy - and you maybe* can't take lower if you personally feel like you could do it if given the chance 

 

*I always think part of the issue with the wider argument is people who are very firmly "get what you can\its a short career\why are you supporting the billionaire\support the player" are unwilling to accept some people's view that the alternative isn't poverty or famine, and would also be fine. 

 

Let's say the Bills want to pay 36/3 and Cook wants 45/3 - I totally get the argument of how can you dare suggest he leave 9 million etc etc - but it's also true that getting paid 36m to run the ball is also very nice. And you get to do it behind a solid line whilst not being run into the ground like a dog. Not saying they should agree, but they seem so hellbent on players always getting the max that all reasonableness goes out the window. 

 

I accept the alternative for the player isn't poverty. But I will always be in favour of the players getting the money and not the owners. And for running backs in particular the market has been tough. I have no problem with Cook wanting top of the market value. If I was his agent that is what I'd be pitching for too. 

[DrDawkinstein]

8 minutes ago, ScottishBills said:

 

I guess they are all stuck then. As you can't really pay high with that philosophy - and you maybe* can't take lower if you personally feel like you could do it if given the chance 

 

*I always think part of the issue with the wider argument is people who are very firmly "get what you can\its a short career\why are you supporting the billionaire\support the player" are unwilling to accept some people's view that the alternative isn't poverty or famine, and would also be fine. 

 

Let's say the Bills want to pay 36/3 and Cook wants 45/3 - I totally get the argument of how can you dare suggest he leave 9 million etc etc - but it's also true that getting paid 36m to run the ball is also very nice. And you get to do it behind a solid line whilst not being run into the ground like a dog. Not saying they should agree, but they seem so hellbent on players always getting the max that all reasonableness goes out the window. 

 

Josh just got a new deal and huge raise when he had a number of years left on the contract he signed and was already paid hundreds of millions of dollars.

 

Start there.

[julian]

56 minutes ago, Matt_In_NH said:

The bills are not a team with a balanced balanced budget.  They are one of the teams pushing money into the future withhold years….. it leading the league that is the eagles.  But they are easy top 10 and probably higher in leveraging the future.  I understand you want every player who sounds available and had an all pro year but that is not going to happen.  The saints have not cleaned up their mess…they just keep pushing it forward and sucking.   
 

what great qbs are not making it to their late 30s?  Cam Newton maybe is one example but he never was the passer Allen is.  He could just hang it up early but all the recent greats have played that long or longer. 

We’ll agree to disagree… cheers !!

[ScottishBills]

17 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I accept the alternative for the player isn't poverty. But I will always be in favour of the players getting the money and not the owners. And for running backs in particular the market has been tough. I have no problem with Cook wanting top of the market value. If I was his agent that is what I'd be pitching for too. 

Mostly agree but would quibble on one small point - the owners don't keep the money. It goes to another player or players (including the OLine opening the holes and the backs making sure is running fresh after a rest)

 

(Assuming spending to the cap, which the Bills I assume do)

 

 

13 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Josh just got a new deal and huge raise when he had a number of years left on the contract he signed and was already paid hundreds of millions of dollars.

 

Start there.

Don't disagree at all with you on this. 

 

I get that there is some NFLPA type do it for the others argument - but I really don't see why Allen or any of the others would take way over 50m. I really don't. They are making their own team worse and their own job harder. It completely confuses me. 

 

At the same time, the reason people don't crash out about it is of course it's (relatively) much easier to replace 4 than 17. Sucks for Cook maybe, but it's reality. So they are the players forced to compromise. 

Edited August 4 by ScottishBills

[thewookie1]

Cook just isn't worth most of the number bantered around.

 

13mil+ and you've lost me; play your last year and go chase a bag next season as a UFA.

 

Want to work with some bonus structures and void years to get a 3 for 35mil with a 15mil signing bonus; go ahead.

 

As long as we have Josh Allen we have a shot, and if we don't, Cook isn't anywhere near the level to compensate for that.    

[GunnerBill]

10 minutes ago, ScottishBills said:

Mostly agree but would quibble on one small point - the owners don't keep the money. It goes to another player or players (including the OLine opening the holes and the backs making sure is running fresh after a rest)

 

 

 

In the case of one player, sure. But as a general principle, no. If players don't drive up the market price for their positions as the cap increases that benefits the owners. I get as a Bills fan it is easy to look at the micro as to how it affects this team and nothing else but you have to look at the macro across the league. The NFLPA and the players themselves have to push the envelope. 

[ScottishBills]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

In the case of one player, sure. But as a general principle, no. If players don't drive up the market price for their positions as the cap increases that benefits the owners. I get as a Bills fan it is easy to look at the micro as to how it affects this team and nothing else but you have to look at the macro across the league. The NFLPA and the players themselves have to push the envelope. 

 

I get what you're saying but the cap goes up every year - and everyone knows who spends to the cap or doesn't. So someone on that 53 is getting paid. It's only about the distribution in the end. 

 

FWIW I think next time round owners will be looking to cut down from whatever percentage players get right now (think it's 48% or 49%, not sure though)

[papazoid]

i think they are too far apart. if a deal was to be made, it would have already been done. 

 

 

 

[GunnerBill]

15 minutes ago, ScottishBills said:

 

I get what you're saying but the cap goes up every year - and everyone knows who spends to the cap or doesn't. So someone on that 53 is getting paid. It's only about the distribution in the end. 

 

FWIW I think next time round owners will be looking to cut down from whatever percentage players get right now (think it's 48% or 49%, not sure though)

 

The first para is only true if you are looking at the micro. Its about the macro. And the owners will not be successful in cutting the percentage (its 48%). If anything yhey may have to increase it or offer another concession to get their 18th game.

[ScottishBills]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The first para is only true if you are looking at the micro. Its about the macro. And the owners will not be successful in cutting the percentage (its 48%). If anything yhey may have to increase it or offer another concession to get their 18th game.

 

Agree to disagree on this. I don't see a macro to deal with - cap goes up, new deals are x% of cap, so they go up almost unwittingly anyway. They just rise with the cap. 

 

Individual position groups maybe have to fight each other to be fair - and RBs have been loud about their role/part in this - that their % is too low now. That's just market forces unfortunately for them. 

[BarleyNY]

1 hour ago, HamptonBillsfan said:

 

Your problem is you’re not correct in your personnel evaluation of this player and impact on the team. Yes,Beane is not willing to pay RBs before their contract demands it. How can you not acknowledge Beane hasn’t extended any RBs or even offered them a 2nd deal other than an occasional inexpensive role player on a one year deal. He wants Cook to take the hometown discount.We’ve never had a RB as good as Cook since Thurman,30 years ago.Don’t demonize Cook or his agents, they deserve a second contract and the market dictates, given Cook’s production, a number between 14 or 15 for 3 years. Deal with it.

 

My evaluation is in line with Spotrac’s and, apparently, Beane’s. I’ve done the work on it and posted it here in the original Cook thread. I came up with $10.5M AAV. Spotrac has $10.2M AAV over 4 seasons. Yours is the outlier.

 

Let me recap some of the reasons he’s not worth close to top of market:

- workload: he’s a 50% snap player. players like Barkley play nearly 100% of the offensive snaps in close games

- he is poor in pass pro and is pedestrian catching out of the backfield

- usage: Cook plays a lot of first and second down snaps. he doesn’t play in the higher leverage situations a 3rd downs, obvious passing situations, short yardage or in obvious rushing situations. so he isn’t on the field to close out games where we’re ahead. he’s not on the field late in games when we have to throw. Or at the goal line. Or 3rd/4th &  1. Or any 3rd down. 

 

What he does do well is that he helps Allen on most first and second downs. He really did take some of the load off of him, which keeps him healthy. That’s worth something. But not anything close to what you think he’s worth. It’s not like a lot of RBs couldn’t be successful in those situations with Allen at QB.